from the DHS-didn't-realize-this? dept

While I tend to think that Wikipedia is a good thing overall, that's because I know it's not a source that should be relied on by itself for important decisions -- such as whether or not to grant political asylum to an individual. It can be useful as a starting point, if that information can be corroborated elsewhere. Apparently, the Department of Homeland Security felt otherwise in
using Wikipedia to deny a request for asylum for a woman. An Appeals Court has now overturned that decision, noting the problems with using Wikipedia as a sole source of info, but the whole scenario should make you wonder. Did DHS really not have the ability to check the legitimacy of the woman's documents without resorting to Wikipedia? What sort of resources are provided to immigration officials that they're making judgments based on a Wikipedia page?

The DHS is a vast bureaucracy, full of functionaries who make decisions on the basis of political correctness and expediency. (Along the lines of what is most likely to be politically useful for the career prospects for the decider.)

I still think its funny . . .

When you ask questions like this;

"Did DHS really not have the ability to check the legitimacy of the woman's documents without resorting to Wikipedia? "

big government republicans). They are chosen on two fundamental criteria; firstly political affiliation (which is of course a violation of the constitution in most cases, but an emperor isn’t answerable to a document anyway) and secondly, their complete and utterly reliable incompetence (remember, government doesn’t work).

It is bad enough that my wife has to ask her high school students not to use wikipedia as a source (often their only source). For DHS to use it for determining asylum applications, how fantastic! Next the'll deny based on myspace and facebook pages.